Many Voices Create a Common Vision

February 20, 1996, I went to the Seventh American Forest Congress, Washington, D.C., as an
optimistic empty vessel. All my limited experiences with other forest stakeholders were positive
and
I expected a constructive outcome. The forester who prepared my management plan did not have
an agenda of his own that he tried to impose on me. My Coverts Project education was
broad-based
encompassing various aspects of forest stewardship and wildlife habitat enhancement. The other
woodland owners I met were responsible concerned forest stewards.

Most Congress participants arrived brimming with apprehension, anxiety, or even antipathy.
Having
previously participated in conflicts over which forest roles &quotought&quot to be dominant or
&quotought&quot to be appropriate, they brought their baggage with them. After the first
morning
session, I believe most participants were able to check their baggage outside the Congress door.

The first American Forestry Congress, held in Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1882, was organized by a few
local politicians and a journalist. It was attended by the only professionally-trained forester in
the
USA, a few timber owners, and many interested community leaders. The seed of responsible
national forest stewardship was planted.

The Sixth American Forest Congress, held in Washington, D.C. in 1975, was called to mark the
100th anniversary of the American Forestry Association. For the first time, discussions included
environmental requirements and energy relationships in addition to the traditional forestry topics
of
protection, management, research, and education.

The Seventh American Forest Congress (SAFC), whose theme was &quotMany Voices, A
Common
Vision,&quot was convened to give the diverse forest stakeholders an opportunity to come
together
in goodwill to explore common ground and to develop a forest vision for the future that all could
support.

Congress organizers developed a collaborative process that allowed all the diverse forest
stakeholders to express their points of view. Each of the 1,500 SAFC participants was assigned
to
a Congress Table with eight or nine other persons. Tablemates were asked to introduce
themselves
to each other including their reasons for involvement in the Congress, to make a formal courtesy
commitment to each other, and to rotate table facilitators and table recorders.

Congress organizers were hard at work for over a year. Draft vision elements and principles for
achieving the vision collected at fifty grass roots round tables held all across the country were
submitted to the SAFC participants for discussion and refinement.

The first phase of the Congress was to develop a vision, a view of a desired state of being.
Visions
are conceptual, general, and qualitative. They are not quantitative. Seven vision elements (that
arose
from the national round tables) were submitted for discussion. Tables were given an opportunity
to
refine the submitted elements and to suggest additional elements.

Suggestions from about 140 tables were synthesized and six elements were added. Participants
were
asked to express their acceptance of each of the thirteen elements by a choice of green, yellow, or
red. Green indicated agreement that the element is part of the vision. Yellow indicated mixed
feelings with a willingness to accept the element. Red indicated rejection of the element. Eight
of
the thirteen elements received over ninety percent (both green and yellow) acceptance ratings.
All
but one received at least sixty percent acceptance.

Intermingled in the above process were two sets of concurrent dialogue sessions offered to
broaden
perspectives on forty forest-related issues. Tablemates were asked to attend different dialogue
sessions and report back to their tables about their discussions.

The second phase was to develop principles to support our common vision. Principles are
guidelines
that structure our approach to achieving our vision. They include rules of conduct based on
values
and morals. Nineteen principles (again from the national round tables) were submitted for
discussion. Tables were given an opportunity to refine the submitted principles and to suggest
additional principles. Agreeing on principles was a more laborious task.

Tablemates were asked to attend different break-out sessions on the nineteen draft principles or
the
&quotmissing principle&quot and report back to their tables. Suggestions resulting from
break-out
sessions and table discussions were synthesized and 42 additional principles were generated.
Tables
were asked to refine the 61 proposed principles and to prepare supporting statements for each
principle. Supporting statements provide the evidence and/or reasoning that gives importance to
or
the rationale for a principle statement. The task was greater than the time available.

Again, green, yellow, and red expressions of acceptance were requested. Consensus was found
on
forty-four percent of the 61 proposed principles which received more greens than yellows and
reds
combined. However, a third of the 61 generated a greater number of reds than greens. And, a
quarter of the 61 had a disapproval rate in excess of 51 percent. Time ran out before a resolution
could be accomplished.

The third phase was to develop &quotnext steps,&quot discrete, specific courses of action to
bring
us closer to achieving our vision. Participants were asked to relocate for an hour and a half to
Home
Tables (where the new tablemates were from their home states) to discuss recommendations for
national and back-home actions needed to achieve our vision based upon our guiding principles.

Later, when we reassembled at our Congress Tables we were asked to discuss individual
commitments to achieve our vision and to share them with the entire Congress.

Congress Table number 98 included three persons with strong forest industry ties, three persons
with
strong (rural or urban) environmental concerns, one state forester, one international forester, and
one
non-industrial private wee woodland owner me.

I was impressed by the goodwill, knowledge, and commitment of this diverse group. Each of us
worked hard. We had good discussions that focused on the broad center of the bell curve where
we
could find common ground rather than waste our three and a half days clashing over areas where
we
could not agree.

My conversations with participants from other tables indicated that most of the tables had this
same
constructive experience, however some tables were not so lucky. A few members of both tails of
our bell-shaped curve vociferously tried to impose their positions on all.

When the Seventh American Forest Congress adjourned my vessel brimmed with new
information,
and most Congress participants were optimistic that our inclusive vision is achievable. While
agreement on how this vision will be attained was not resolved, all the participants departed
motivated to try in their own way.

Sandra West owns an 18-acre Certified Tree Farm on the top of
Catoctin
Mountain in Frederick County, Maryland. She bought the land in 1990 and moved into her
newly built neo-Victorian home there in January 1991.

In December 1991 her local Project Forester completed a forest resource conservation plan for
her property.

In September 1993 Sandra West participated in Coverts Project training directed by Jonathan
Kays of Maryland Cooperative Extension Service. For her reciprocity project she made an
enthusiastic effort to spread the word about the Coverts Project in her neighborhood and
throughout Frederick County.

The Maryland Coverts (pronounced kuv erts) Project, which is sponsored by The Ruffed Grouse
Society and administered by Maryland Cooperative Extension Service, is a scholarship program
designed to teach woodland owners that good forest management can improve wildlife habitat at
the same time it enhances timber production, investment growth, recreational opportunities, or
woodland aesthetics. (Ten other, primarily Northeastern, states have Coverts programs
sponsored by The Ruffed Grouse Society.)

West Weald, West's wee woodland, was designated a Certified Tree Farm in December
1996.